“No experiment can be more interesting than that we are trying, and which we trust will end in establishing the fact, that man may be governed by reason and truth. Our first objective should therefore be, to leave open to him all the avenues of truth. The most effectual hitherto found, is the freedom of the press. It is, therefore, the first shut up by those who fear the investigation of their actions.”–Thomas Jefferson
STANFORD, Calif.–President Obama is planning to hand the U.S. Commerce Department authority over a forthcoming cybersecurity effort to create an Internet ID for Americans, a White House official said here today
It’s “the absolute perfect spot in the U.S. government” to centralize efforts toward creating an “identity ecosystem” for the Internet, White House Cybersecurity Coordinator Howard Schmidt said.
That news, first reported by CNET, effectively pushes the department to the forefront of the issue, beating out other potential candidates, including the National Security Agency and the Department of Homeland Security. The move also is likely to please privacy and civil-liberties groups that have raised concerns in the past over the dual roles of police and intelligence agencies.
The announcement came at an event today at the Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research, where U.S. Commerce Secretary Gary Locke and Schmidt spoke.
The Obama administration is currently drafting what it’s calling the National Strategy for Trusted Identities in Cyberspace, which Locke said will be released by the president in the next few months. (An early version was publicly released last summer.)
Note: The following text is a transcription of the first ten amendments to the Constitution in their original form. These amendments were ratified December 15, 1791, and form what is known as the “Bill of Rights.”
Bill of Rights: Click for larger view
Congress of the United States
begun and held at the City of New-York, on
Wednesday the fourth of March, one thousand seven hundred and eighty nine.
THE Conventions of a number of the States, having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best ensure the beneficent ends of its institution.
RESOLVED by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, two thirds of both Houses concurring, that the following Articles be proposed to the Legislatures of the several States, as amendments to the Constitution of the United States, all, or any of which Articles, when ratified by three fourths of the said Legislatures, to be valid to all intents and purposes, as part of the said Constitution; viz.
ARTICLES in addition to, and Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America, proposed by Congress, and ratified by the Legislatures of the several States, pursuant to the fifth Article of the original Constitution. Continue reading “Happy Bill of Rights Day!” »
Are you ready? Your government wants to know. Why? During Katrina, FEMA was rounding up private food, generators and other items from citizens who stored them becoming guilty of significant Fourth and Ninth Amendment violations of the Bill of Rights. Now the Oath Keepers learned that they spit on the Fourth, again, by targeting the organization that provides foods for emergencies by taking a fishing trip through their records. It is no secret that the Supreme Court has twisted the Fourth Amendment far afield from what the “founding fathers” intended. But, at least, they say that police powers have to have reasonable cause to believe that a crime has been committed to conduct a search. That is why TSA searches are unconstitutional. Wanting to fly is not reasonable cause to believe that a four-year old girl needs to be fondled in public.
Oath Keepers has learned that federal agents recently visited a Latter Day Saints (Mormon) Church food storage cannery in Tennessee, demanding customer lists, wanting to know the identity of Americans who are purchasing food storage from the Mormons.
This incident was confirmed, in person, by Oath Keepers Tennessee Chapter President, Rand Cardwell. Here is Rand’s report:
“A fellow veteran contacted me concerning a new and disturbing development. He had been utilizing a Mormon cannery near his home to purchase bulk food supplies. The man that manages the facility relayed to him that federal agents had visited the facility and demanded a list of individuals that had been purchasing bulk food. The manager informed the agents that the facility kept no such records and that all transactions were conducted on a cash-and-carry basis. The agents pressed for any record of personal checks, credit card transactions, etc., but the manager could provide no such record. The agents appeared to become very agitated and after several minutes of questioning finally left with no information. I contacted the manager and personally confirmed this information.
The Desert Freedom Press Publisher Jennifer Jones was arrested Friday afternoon in the Quartzsite Post Office by Sergeant Xavier Frausto and Police Chief Jeff Gilbert. Jones states that she repeatedly asked them what the charge was, but they refused to tell her. Later, she finally learned that she had been charged with felony witness tampering, over an unsubstantiated allegation made by a woman named Denise Florian.
Florian, who admits to having a drug and alchohol problem moved to Quartzsite over the summer and was almost immediately appointed to the town personnel board to oversee the appeal hearings of the Quartzsite police officers wrongfully terminated over the summer. She was subsequently appointed to the town Health and Development Board which then made recommendations to the council about how much money to give the Senior Center, Museum, and Chamber of Commerce.
Americans completely stripped of all rights under Section 1031
Paul Joseph Watson
Infowars.com
Friday, December 2, 2011
The Senate last night codified into law the power of the U.S. military to indefinitely detain an American citizen with no charge, no trial and no oversight whatsoever with the passage of S. 1867, the National Defense Authorization Act.
One amendment that would have specifically blocked the measures from being used against U.S. citizens was voted down and the final bill was passed 93-7.
Another amendment introduced by Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Dianne Feinstein that attempted to bar the provision from being used on American soil, an effort to ensure “the military won’t be roaming our streets looking for suspected terrorists,” also failed, although Feinstein voted in favor of the bill anyway.
Fellow entrepreneurs, Americans, anyone who still cares about this country at all — this is a must read: By the end of this week, the US government very likely will have the power to lock up US citizens for life at Guantanamo Bay or other military prisons — without charge and without trial. This means that, in the near future, a controversial Twitter post, attending a peaceful protest, or publishing an anti-Congress critique or anti-TSA rant on Google+ could land you “indefinite detention” for life, in the wording of the bill. No access to a lawyer, no access to trial.
Yes, you read that right. This would target American citizens, on American soil. Military personnel would be able to come into your house like something out of a Tom Clancy novel and chopper your innocent self down to Guantanamo Bay for life.
Manassas, VA --(Ammoland.com)- On August 24, 2011, federal agents of the Fish and Wildlife Service raided offices and production facilities of the Gibson Guitar company.
They sent workers home and confiscated several pallets of wood along with computer files and numerous guitars (amounting to about $2 million in lost production and property).
This was the second raid on Gibson in as many years over questions about some of the wood the legendary guitar makers use in their products. The timing of the latest raid is convenient for the government as they are currently trying to convince a federal judge to indefinitely delay a lawsuit from Gibson demanding the return of some half-million dollars worth of ebony wood seized by federal agents back in 2009. No charges have ever been filed against the company regarding that raid, but the government has continued to refuse to return the seized wood which they suspected might have been illegally harvested in Madagascar.
The object of the August 24 raid appears to have been wood imported from India. Gibson says that they have been extra careful to document all of the wood they import since the 2009 federal assault and that the particular wood in question was acquired from a supplier certified by the Forrest Stewardship Council, an environmental organization set up to protect endangered trees by identifying legally harvested wood and closing markets to illegally cut products. The particular wood in question was purchased and imported from India with an extensive paper-trail from the Indian government and the US Customs Service. According to Gibson, the Fish and Wildlife Service is claiming that the wood violates an Indian requirement that wood exported from the country must be processed to a certain degree by Indian craftsmen prior to export. Gibson says this requirement was either met or waived by the Indian government as demonstrated by India’s export authorizations. The Indian government did not sanction or participate in the August raid.
The filming of government officials while on duty is protected by the First Amendment, said the Court
The First Circuit Court of Appeals reached a crucial decision last Friday allowing the public to videotape police officers while they’re on the clock.
The decision comes after a string of incidents where individuals have videotaped police officers and were arrested. Police officers across the United States believed citizens didn’t have the right to videotape them as they conducted official duties, but issues like police brutality put the issue up for debate.
One instance where a citizen was arrested for videotaping an officer was when Khaliah Fitchette, a law-abiding teenager from New Jersey, boarded a bus in Newark. Two police officers boarded the bus as well to remove a drunken man. Fitchette began taping the police officers because of how they were handling the man, and a police officer instructed her to stop recording them. When Fitchette refused, she was arrested and placed in the back of a cop car for two hours while the officers took her phone to delete the video. Fitchette was then released, but she and her mother then filed suit against the Newark Police Department with the New Jersey chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU).
Another example involves Simon Glik, a passerby on the Boston Common. He used his cell phone to tape police officers when the Boston police were punching a man. Citizens surrounding the scene were saying, “You’re hurting him.” Glik never interfered with the police officers’ actions, but recorded the entire incident. The police officers ended up charging Glik with violating a wiretap statute that prohibits secret recording, even though the police officers admitted that they knew Glik was recording them. He was also charged with disturbing the peace and aiding the escape of a prisoner.
QUARTZSITE, AZ—Saturday’s Quartzsite Liberty Festival made its mark on Quartzsite Saturday as planned, despite temperatures of 114 to 117 degrees.
The rally was arranged to protest the actions of the town’s council and police chief, most conspicuously the treatment of Quartzsite police officers who were suspended or fired in what the protestors say was retaliation for bringing formal allegations against Chief Jeff Gilbert.
Marchers chanted “Quartzsite Ten, oath-keeping men” as they walked over 2.5 miles from an RV park south of I-10, over the freeway bridge and along the streets of Quartzsite to Town Hall.
Several politically active groups were in attendance, including Oath Keepers, the Tea Party Patriots, the Sons of Liberty Riders and campaigners for Ron Paul for President 2012.
Many attendees carried flags, banners and signs. Some were armed with pistols or rifles, and cameras of all sorts. Law enforcement and other authorities were largely absent from the demonstration.
John Locke was an English philosopher widely considered the father of liberalism. He wrote widely on Democracy and had a profound influence on our founding fathers. Especially Thomas Jefferson in the writing of the Declaration of Independence.
Liberalism, today, does not mean what it did, however.
“Classical liberalism is a philosophy committed to the ideal of limited government, constitutionalism, rule of law, due process, and liberty of individuals including freedom of religion, speech, press, assembly, and free markets.”—WikiPedia
Locke Democracy is not like Marxist Communist “Democracy” that the Democratic party and Unions practice today. Under the liberty of individuals is, also, the right to fully own your property that you purchase with no government “rent” or regulation.
Marx wanted government to own everything, enslave the people and pay for his home and food without having to work. Locke, unlike the lazy Marx, actually worked for a living.
Last week I commented on the Republican Presidential candidates’ knowledge of the Constitution. In that message I made the statement that the Constitution prevents an Obamacare-style individual mandate regardless of whether it’s implemented by the Federal government or a State government. Many of you responded with the same question: “What part of the U.S. Constitution prevents a State government from imposing an individual mandate?” This message is my response to that question:
The U.S. Constitution imposes upon the Federal government a duty to protect certain rights of individual citizens against intrusion by State government. This duty arises from at least two places in the Constitution: Article IV section 2, and the 14th Amendment.
Article IV section 2 states: “The citizens of each State shall be entitled to the privileges and immunities of citizens in the several States.”
The 14th Amendment section 1 states: “No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”
These sections unquestionably do impose upon the Federal government a duty to protect individual citizens from State violations of certain rights. But, the question is: what rights are protected from State intrusion? That question has been debated since the Constitution was ratified. We fought a war over it, and the question is still being hotly debated. When it’s answered poorly States lose sovereignty, millions of babies are murdered, private property is stolen by States, and many other rights are violated. When it’s answered properly States are prevented from denying free speech, prevented from imprisoning individuals without a jury trial, prevented from disarming their citizens, and prevented from stealing private property. Continue reading “Are we in a prison without bars?” »
The requirement would have forced farmers to obtain commercial driver’s licenses for equipment
Wednesday, August 17, 2011
By JOEL TURNER – Staff Writer
Fifth District Congressman Robert Hurt (R-Chatham) said that the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) has dropped a proposal to require farmers to obtain commercial driver’s licenses to use and transport farm vehicles and equipment.
Due to pressure from Congress and the agricultural community, Hurt said, the DOT announced that it would not pursue any new rules or regulations governing the transport of agricultural products.
“Thankfully, this nonsensical concept has been abandoned,” the congressman said.
The regulatory burden that the federal government places on America’s farmers is already staggering, he said.
“Unnecessary rules restricting the use of farm vehicles or imposing excessive regulatory requirements would only make these burdens more onerous and impede farmers’ ability to bring their crops to market at a time when they can least afford it,” Hurt said.
When first I began this intellectual exercise, I did not anticipate being deluged by information concerning the topic. Particularly recent SCOTUS decisions. On June 16th, the SCOTUS returned their surprising decision in the case of Carol Anne Bond v. United States (564 U.S.______(2011)). This case seems to be a significant departure in the thought of the Supreme Court of the United States, as I read it. We will explore that later in this article.
The main purpose for the addition of these few introductory lines is simply to let you know that I will endeavor to be as accurate and coherent as possible for the purposes of this article despite this deluge. Yet mistakes may creep in. In addition, I continue to caution that I am not a lawyer, but a scholar seeking some truth to this particular Constitutional division of power.
In this article I reference the USC or United States Code. The USC is the actual book of federal laws as passed by Congress. These are not to be confused with the Federal Register which is a list of “regulations” or “laws” set forth by people whom you did not vote for. These are usually based on the desires of corporate entities. Sounds somewhat “undemocratic” for such a “democratic” society.
CD-1 candidate Wenona Benally Baldenegro has recently focused a lot of time and energy accusing Congressman Paul Gosar of being an extreme tea party Republican. The Huffington Post even covered her campaign with an article titled Arizona’s New Democrats: Wenona’s Bid Inspires Bipartisan Campaign Against Radical Tea Party Rep. Gosar.
Interesting campaign strategy but there’s a huge problem with the premise. Congressman Gosar is anything but a tea party Republican. Yes, he was endorsed by Sarah Palin and yes, he was elected largely due to tea party support but that is where his tea party credibility ends.
Having been very involved with the tea party during the 2010 election, I know firsthand that many in the tea party gave Gosar their complete support based solely on his opposition to the national healthcare bill (and the fact that he waved a pocket Constitution around and promised to consult it before every vote). Few bothered to check any further. If they would have, they would have realized that Gosar is your average status quo Republican who will vote party over principle every single chance he gets. It also would have been clear that Gosar has zero respect for the Constitution, individual rights and personal freedom (perfect example: Gosar was part of a movement a decade ago that tried to force fluoride on the residents of Flagstaff ).
Gosar’s recent vote to raise the debt ceiling along with his votes to extend the “Patriot Act” fly in the face of his supposed tea party principles. These votes (and others) have led to tea party members abandoning the Gosar ship in droves.
February 5, 2012 1906 John Carradine 1920 Frank Muir CBE 1946 Charlotte Rampling 1948 Barbara Hershey 1948 Lord Haden Guest 1948 Sven-Goran Eriksson 1952 Russell Grant 1962 Jennifer Jason Leigh 1966 Jose Maria Olazabal
Have a question concerning the Constitution and your rights? You can try our U.S. Succinct Court Office.. WE ARE NOT LAWYERS and we CANNOT GIVE ADVISE on any case that may be pending for or against you. We can, however, provide links to resources that might answer your questions. Feel free to use our Contact Form.
The Constitutional Republic Party web site is NOT a non-profit organization for tax purposes. We do not provide candidates for office, but we support candidates with Constitutional views. Our current purpose is to provide education about the true purpose of the Constitution, the Bill of Rights and other historic documents. We do provide information and news which may have an impact on your Constitutional rights.
We will publish almost any, intelligent articles and opinions that do not contain cursing and do not advocate physical violence against an individual or group of individuals---even if they are belligerent. Those opinions expressed and comments in reply to such opinions are solely those of the authors.
STANFORD, Calif.–President Obama is planning to hand the U.S. Commerce Department authority over a forthcoming cybersecurity effort to create an Internet ID for Americans, a White House official said here today
Loading ...
